2020, anyone?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

ASA does not allow players to drop skill levels once they have played in qualifiers. An 18 gold player can not drop to 18's, and a 16 player that has played up in 18's can not drop back to 16's. I would tend to argue that a lot of college programs are a level above gold. Are they all? Not even close, but where do you draw the line?

Not true. Teams are classified, not players (in JO). A 16yo can always play in that age bracket regardless of the level played the previous season.

IOW, a JO player whose team participated in this years 18U Gold can play on a 16U team next year if still age eligible. Likely? Depends on the player, parents and maybe even available resources, but completely legal.

Apparently this really SIMPLE system is beyond the grasp of many people. The player's ability to join the roster of any particular team is based solely on the player's birth date.

[argodad]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

Yes it is. And what I wrote includes 100's of "colleges" in all Divisions.

Tony,
My DD's experience (four years at a top-tier DII) isn't at all representative of your generalizations.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

These players are up at 5:30am for conditioning, and practice in the AM before classes at 9. After classes at 4pm, which are scheduled around softball, they spend another 5 hours on practices, training and more conditioning, etc. They get back to their rooms at 1030pm to do their homework, then they get up at 530am the next day and do it again. They are are spending the entire school year with 6 to 8 hours EVERY DAY working on softball.

Using the 14-u analogy with high school is absurd. College players are are not "students" they are "employees". Paid to play.

Then they are in violation of NCAA eligibility rules and the NFCA Code of Ethics.

Hell, we just as well ask the DOJ for a full scale investigation and shut own the entire program since, according to you, they are all cheating and in violation.

[tcannizzo]

NCAA puts a maximum of 20 mandatory hours per week. Coaches and AD's know how to play the game. This is where it breaks down. You get a scholarship, and only put in the mandatory, and you are GONE!

This is not news. The NCAA knows EXACTLY what is going on, and puts on the game face, which is where the farce of denial begins.

I am not going to take the bait as to the definition of "cheating" there are several threads on this board and others that never end. They are not in violation because the other 60 hours per week are published as "non-mandatory".

We don't need the DOJ to close down the program, but an honest and simple investigation by the ASA should be very revealing.

[tcannizzo]

Originally Posted by argodad

Tony,
My DD's experience (four years at a top-tier DII) isn't at all representative of your generalizations.

Larry, I respect that and I believe what you wrote.
While my position is one of generalizations, but I did not even come close to saying it was at 100% across the board. I believe by saying that "100's of colleges" do this, that I am in the "grossly under-estimated" category.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

NCAA puts a maximum of 20 mandatory hours per week. Coaches and AD's know how to play the game. This is where it breaks down. You get a scholarship, and only put in the mandatory, and you are GONE!

This is not news. The NCAA knows EXACTLY what is going on, and puts on the game face, which is where the farce of denial begins.

I am not going to take the bait as to the definition of "cheating" there are several threads on this board and others that never end. They are not in violation because the other 60 hours per week are published as "non-mandatory".

We don't need the DOJ to close down the program, but an honest and simple investigation by the ASA should be very revealing.

And why should the ASA investigate anything, they are not the one's with a complaint. Come to think of it, neither are the college coaches or players.

It seems, the only ones that seem to have a problem are those who rely upon selling their services and the parents who buy into them.

Hmmmm......

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

And why should the ASA investigate anything, they are not the one's with a complaint. Come to think of it, neither are the college coaches or players.

It seems, the only ones that seem to have a problem are those who rely upon selling their services and the parents who buy into them.

Hmmmm......

Remarkable at .. how sudden this issue... became an issue... all of a sudden.

[tcannizzo]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

And why should the ASA investigate anything, ......

Let's see. That's right, the ASA is not in the investigation business...we know that is not true. One example is bats, another is balls, age cut offs, and dozens others. What has any of that got to do with anything except declaring a National Championship?

Why should they look into this? Because it is negatively and severely impacting the ASA Gold program.
Why wouldn't they look into it, instead of just being argumentative?

If a study was done, it would prove or disprove any hypothesis and end this issue which has been an on-going controversy for over 10 years.

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

Let's see. That's right, the ASA is not in the investigation business...we know that is not true. One example is bats, another is balls, age cut offs, and dozens others. What has any of that got to do with anything except declaring a National Championship?

Why should they look into this? Because it is negatively and severely impacting the ASA Gold program.
Why wouldn't they look into it, instead of just being argumentative?

If a study was done, it would prove or disprove any hypothesis and end this issue which has been an on-going controversy for over 10 years.

OK, I'm not always a big supporter of ASA.
But where does setting a standard mean the same thing as investingating potential infractions?

[tcannizzo]

Are you implying that ASA sets the standards without first investigating?
That could explain a lot.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

...Why should they look into this? Because it is negatively and severely impacting the ASA Gold program.
Why wouldn't they look into it, instead of just being argumentative?

If a study was done, it would prove or disprove any hypothesis and end this issue which has been an on-going controversy for over 10 years.

Who is this "they" of whom you speak? It is easy to speak of "ASA" as some monolith of power over softball, but in reality it is nothing more than the people who meet and vote on such things. If I read the earlier posts correctly, this issue has never been reported out of the JO committee. I would seem, as with Pogo, the JO coaches have met the enemy, and it is them...

[tcannizzo]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Who is this "they" of whom you speak?

Uh, ASA.

Originally Posted by Dakota

It is easy to speak of "ASA" as some monolith of power over softball, but in reality it is nothing more than the people who meet and vote on such things.

Let's see . . . the National Governing Body of Softball? Oh, you are right, they are nothing more than USSSA, USFA, ISA, LL, Pony, and the LSOTPHFCCSA (that is, the Little Sisters of the Poor Home for Crippled Children's Softball Association)

Originally Posted by Dakota

If I read the earlier posts correctly, this issue has never been reported out of the JO committee. I would seem, as with Pogo, the JO coaches have met the enemy, and it is them...

Nice try with the Pogo comparison. At the 2001 Gold Nationals, in Marietta, GA at the coaches meeting the question was asked, "Should college players be allowed?", It looked like every coach voted NO, as I did not see one hand go up in the affirmative. But we still have the status quo. So much for listening up.

Like Pogo, you are living in a cartoon world, where reality is often imitated, but reality is often denied.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

At the 2001 Gold Nationals, in Marietta, GA at the coaches meeting the question was asked, "Should college players be allowed?", It looked like every coach voted NO, as I did not see one hand go up in the affirmative. But we still have the status quo. So much for listening up.

Yes, the status quo was kept by the same coaches you seem to be citing 8 years later. Of course, you are providing one-sided, incomplete data. I would be curous as to how many of those coaches had college ball players on their roster.

Again, proving the MY point that if the 18U coaches did not recruit and roster college players there would be no college players in 18U.

How many different ways can you take this without it coming back to the coaches?

[tcannizzo]

Study: College athletes are full-time workers
Read the full story:
Study: College athletes are full-time workers - USATODAY.com

[tcannizzo]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Yes, the status quo was kept by the same coaches you seem to be citing 8 years later. Of course, you are providing one-sided, incomplete data. I would be curous as to how many of those coaches had college ball players on their roster.

What? I would be curious to know how many of the Gold coaches in attendance and voting are on the JO Committee. I don't remember her name, but it was the National JO Commissioner at the time, Patty? Cindy?

How does a unanimous vote not get out of Committee?

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Again, proving the MY point that if the 18U coaches did not recruit and roster college players there would be no college players in 18U.

Rule #1 of Military Strategy: No matter what the outcome, declare victory. Good grief sir, how can you be that far off?

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

How many different ways can you take this without it coming back to the coaches?

I only need one lucid thought from you, Until then....about as many as you can try to manufacture.